(Newser)
–
David Petraeus stopped by to say he's not overwhelmed by his 2011 deadline in Afghanistan, but President Obama's stance on the Ground Zero mosque was pretty much the only game on the Sunday shows today. The GOP should keep its paws off the Constitution, DNC chair Tim Kaine said, while Chris Van Hollen said he agreed with Obama that “The issue is one for the people of New York City.” To which the Democratic rep from the NYC district in question said, "There's no way for government to block this." Politico runs down the list:

NY Republican Peter King, meanwhile, knocked Obama for "trying to have it both ways" and said if he “was going to get into this, he should have been much more clear."

John Cornyn said the mosque issue would haunt Obama come November. “The president himself seems to be disconnected from the mainstream of America…and that’s why Americans are frustrated,” he said.

Kaine also came back to slap the GOP for "raising wacky ideas," like repealing the 14th Amendment.

“Michael Steele has failed miserably to do the things he’s supposed to do," said GOP strategist Henry Rollins, declaring the RNC chair a "disaster."

Muslims only care if this one mosque is built at ground zero because it is another way for them to show their dominance to the United States and make the changes they want to make in this country. They want Sharia law enforced in America. Sharia law is used in many Muslim countries to justify shocking acts of barbarity including stoning, the execution of homosexuals, and the subjugation of women. Sharia does not permit freedom of conscience; it prohibits Muslims from renouncing their Islamic faith or converting to another religion. Sharia does not support religious liberty; it treats non-Muslims as inferior and does not accord them the same protections as Muslims. In these and other instances, sharia is explicitly at odds with core American and Western values. It is an explicit repudiation of freedom of conscience and religious liberty as well as the premise that citizens are equal under the law. The radical Islamist effort to impose sharia worldwide is a direct threat to all those who believe in the freedoms maintained by our constitutional system. In some ways, it speaks of the goodness of America that we have had such difficulty coming to grips with the challenge of radical Islamists. It is our very commitment to religious liberty that makes us uncomfortable with defining our enemies in a way that appears linked with religious belief. However, America's commitment to religious liberty has given radical Islamists a potent rhetorical weapon in their pursuit of sharia supremacy. In a deliberately dishonest campaign exploiting our belief in religious liberty, radical Islamists are actively engaged in a public relations campaign to try and browbeat Americans (and other Western countries) to accept the imposition of sharia in certain communities, no matter how deeply sharia law is in conflict with the protections afforded by the civil law and the democratic values undergirding our constitutional system. The problem of creeping sharia is most visibly on display in France and in the United Kingdom, where there are Muslim enclaves in which the police have surrendered authority and sharia reigns. However, worrisome cases are starting to emerge in the United States that show sharia is coming here. A book by Andy McCarthy, "The Grand Jihad", has been invaluable in tracking instances in which the American government and major public institutions have been unwilling to assert the protections of American law and American values over sharia's religious code. Radical Islamism is more than simply a religious belief. It is a comprehensive political, economic, and religious movement that seeks to impose sharia--Islamic law--upon all aspects of global society. Many Muslims see sharia as simply a reference point for their personal code of conduct. They recognize the distinction between their personal beliefs and the laws that govern all people of all faiths. Shockingly, sharia honor killings-in which Muslim women are murdered by their husbands, brothers or other male family members for dishonoring their family-are also on the rise in America but do not receive national attention because they are considered "domestic disturbances." (A recent article in Marie Claire Magazine highlights recent cases and the efforts to bring national attention to this horrifying trend.) Cases like this will become all the more common as radical Islamists grow more and more aggressive in the United States. It is in this context that the controversy over the proposed mosque near Ground Zero must be seen. To the radical muslims it is not over a mosque it is over their intent to little by little take over our country by making their laws the dominant ones.

ddhartman

Aug 16, 2010 10:34 AM CDT

I don't condone burning the flag, but I support your freedom to do so. I can't expect your support for my freedom of religion (Christianity), if I don't support your freedom of religion. How can I be a supporter of the first amendment and not allow you the freedom to build your mosque, temple, shrine, whatever where ever you have the legal right to build. I agree that it appears to rub salt into the wounds of many, but legally they have the right, and I for one am unwilling to give up that right.

Eleutherius

Aug 16, 2010 1:31 AM CDT

Wait are some people actually saying that they think the mosque should be prohibited and not just that they don't like it? If so, that's... nuts